Case 4:12-cv Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 179

Similar documents
Case 4:12-cv Y Document 96 Filed 02/28/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID 717

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Case3:05-cv WHA Document1 Filed02/14/05 Page1 of 5

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH, TEXAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO.: 1. BREACH OF IMPLIED CONTRACT 2. TRESPASS TO CHATTEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Case 2:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/24/18 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:1. Deadline UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:15-cv JLS-JMA Document 1 Filed 06/26/15 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Case 2:15-cv SVW-AS Document 1 Filed 02/12/15 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1

Case 2:19-cv RSWL-SS Document 14 Filed 02/19/19 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:164

Case: 5:15-cv SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/20/15 2 of 9. PageID #: 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION

Case 3:15-cv AJB-KSC Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 PageID.1 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA PHOENIX ARIZONA DIVISION. Plaintiff, pro se )

Case 3:18-cv JSC Document 1 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:19-cv PAB Document 1 Filed 01/04/19 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Cause No NUMBER 3

TO BE FILED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

Courthouse News Service

Cause No DEFENDANT S MOTION OBJECTING TO ORDER OF REFERRAL TO MEDIATION TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

26 /1/ 28 /1/ Donny E. Brand (SBN ) BRAND LAW FIRM E. 4th St., Suite C-473

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES WITH JURY DEMAND

Case 4:14-cv RAS Document 1 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

Case 2:17-cv JAM-EFB Document 1 Filed 10/31/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Case 3:10-cv B Document 1 Filed 09/10/10 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 2:17-cv JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 17

3:17-cv MGL Date Filed 06/29/18 Entry Number 55 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

led FEB SUPERIOR COURl l.h '-.. irornia BY DEPUTY 1. GENERAL NEGLIGENCE 2. WILLFUL MISCONDUCT 3. WRONGFUL DEATH 4.

Mary Cummins 645 W 9th St # Los Angeles, CA Direct: (310) Fax: (310)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS DIVISION COMPLAINT. COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Patrick Hardy, by and through his attorney, Joshua D.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION

Case 5:17-cv Document 2 Filed in TXSD on 01/17/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LAREDO DIVISION

Case 2:06-cv FSH-PS Document 20 Filed 01/10/08 Page 1 of 7

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case 1:14-cv Document 1 Filed 06/05/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

Appeal No CV County Court Case No APPELLANT S MOTION FOR EXTENSION, REQUEST FOR COURT RECORDS

FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 01/26/ :43 AM INDEX NO /2018E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2018

3:18-cv MGL Date Filed 07/31/18 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

GRAY, L.L.C. 760 ROUTE 10 WEST, SUITE 203 WHIPPANY, NEW JERSEY PH: F: Attorneys for Plaintiff S.P., a fictitious name

Plaintiff, Joseph DiNoto, by and through his attorney, avers the following against the PARTIES

Case5:11-cv EJD Document28 Filed09/09/11 Page1 of 10

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 09/13/13 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION V. CAUSE NO.: COMPLAINT (JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)

Courthouse News Service

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

Case 1:18-cv ECF No. 1 filed 06/20/18 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CENTRAL BRANCH -- UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

Case 5:14-cv CMC Document 1 Filed 12/05/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

Case 3:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/30/19 Page 1 of 17

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/15/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

CASE 0:12-cv PJS-TNL Document 15 Filed 08/14/12 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 4:12-cv Y Document 137 Filed 05/03/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID 1087

Case 3:18-cv SB Document 1 Filed 09/06/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION. Case No.

Case 2:13-cv MLCF-JCW Document 1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

3:17-cv MGL Date Filed 08/29/18 Entry Number 88 Page 1 of 10

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

Case 3:12-cv CRS Document 1 Filed 06/15/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1

DJAS FILED. eelveo PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES. Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 02/20/18 Page 1 of 18. Case No.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Cause No NUMBER 2 DISTRICT. Plaintiff s cause is completely without merit. It is based on forged s, forged

Case: 3:12-cv JZ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/21/12 1 of 7. PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv JTM-KGG Document 21 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH. Case No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 3:14-cv BR Document 1 Filed 10/09/14 Page 1 of 7

Plaintiff, for its Complaint against the above-captioned Defendants, states and

Case 2:12-cv ABJ Document 1 Filed 05/02/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING

COPY 1AR ) Dept.: P52 ) 2. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 17 ) 4. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 19 )

CASE NO. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL. The Plaintiff, CHARLESETTA WALKER, as CONSERVATOR FOR THE PERSON,

UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk

DISTRICT COURT CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

Case 1:12-cv WGY Document 6 Filed 10/04/12 Page 1 of 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRCT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:14-cv WTL-MJD Document 1 Filed 02/12/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

Case 3:15-cv EDL Document 1 Filed 12/09/15 Page 1 of 16

Filing # E-Filed 12/22/ :53:20 PM

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. Plaintiff. vs. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON, A CORPORATION SOLE; JOSEPH FLYNN; J. KEVIN MCANDREWS, Defendants

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 09/19/18 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 1:18-cv MPM-DAS Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/03/18 1 of 16 PageID #: 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND

COMPLAINT. The Plaintiff, Marie Menard, brings this civil action for violation of her rights secured

Transcription:

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 179 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION MARY CUMMINS Plaintiff, vs. AMANDA LOLLAR, DENISE TOMLINSON, DOROTHY HYATT, MICHELLE MCCAULLEY, KATE RUGRODEN, LESLIE STURGES, BAT WORLD SANCTUARY, JOHN DOES 1-10 Defendants. CIVIL ACTION Civil Action No.: 4:12-CV-00560-Y JURY SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1. Cummins is a licensed California real estate appraiser and expert witness with over 28 years of experience. She is also a licensed wildlife rehabilitator specializing in mammals including bats. 2. May 2010 Cummins was forwarded a notice of internship from Bat World Sanctuary. 3. May 2010 Amanda Lollar President of Bat World Sanctuary via email to Cummins in California asked Cummins to be an intern at Bat World Sanctuary. Cummins took time away from her real estate appraisal business and non-profit to intern at Bat World Sanctuary. 4. While Cummins was at Bat World Sanctuary Amanda Lollar instructed Cummins to enter the wild sanctuary building at 115 N.E. 1st St., Mineral Wells, Texas. Cummins was instructed to put on a hair net/hat, booties and a head lamp to enter the darkened building to clean guano and check for ill, injured and orphaned bats. Cummins was further instructed to climb up a step stool to climb through a window to go out onto the roof of the building to look for bats outside. While Cummins attempted to climb through the window late June 2010 she hit her head on a piece of 1

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 2 of 7 PageID 180 wood. Cummins then fell backward injuring both her head and back passing out onto the hard floor. Cummins did not know that the building did not have an occupancy permit and was not up to code at the time she entered the building. 5. Cummins left the internship early. Immediately upon her return she visited doctors and medical practitioners to receive medical attention PARTIES 6. Plaintiff Mary Cummins is a resident of Los Angeles County, California who also maintains her principal place of business there as well. 7. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary President Amanda Lollar is a resident of Palo Pinto County, Texas. 8. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary Treasurer Denise Tomlinson is a resident of Port Charles, Florida. 9. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary Vice President Dorothy Hyatt is a resident of Roanoke, Texas. 10. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary Secretary Michelle McCaulley is a resident of Corrales, New Mexico. 11. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary board member Kate Rugroden is a resident of Arlington, Texas. 12. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary board member Leslie Sturges is a resident of Annadale, Virginia. 13. Defendant Bat World Sanctuary is an unknown business entity located in Palo Pinto County, Texas. 2

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 3 of 7 PageID 181 14. Cummins is unaware of the names and true capacities of defendants, whether individual, corporate and/or partnership entities, named herein as DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues them for their fictitious names. Cummins will seek leave to amend this complaint when the true names and capacities of DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are ascertained. Cummins is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges than the above-listed defendants and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are in some manner responsible for the wrongs alleged herein, and that at all times referenced each was the agent and servant of the other defendants and was acting within the course and scope of said agency and employment. 15. Cummins is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all relevant times herein, each of the defendants, including DOES 1 through 10, inclusive (collectively Defendants directly knew or reasonably should have known of the acts and behavior alleged herein and the damages caused thereby, and by their actions and/or inaction directed, ratified and encouraged such acts and behavior. Cummins further alleges that Defendants had a nondelegable duty to prevent such acts and the behavior described herein, which duty Defendants failed and/or refused to perform. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 16. This court has subject matter jurisdiction based on complete diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332. Defendants are located in Texas, Florida, California, Virginia and New Mexico. John Doe defendants may be located in other states. Damages resulting from the matter exceed $75,000 exclusive of costs. Plaintiff requests exemplary and punitive damages in the amount of $500,000. 3

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 4 of 7 PageID 182 17. Venue is this district is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391(a because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the damages occurred in this district. Against All Defendants FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENCE 18. Cummins incorporates by reference each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 17, inclusive, in this claim for relief. 19. Defendants owed a duty to exercise the use of ordinary care to prevent injury to others, including Cummins. 20. Defendants breached their duty to Cummins by failing to act in a manner consistent with the standard of care exercised by the average reasonable person. 21. Defendants negligent acts or omissions were a substantial factor in bringing about Cummins injury. Defendants did not tell Cummins that the building did not have an occupancy permit, was not up to code, the premises were dangerous and the step stool was unstable. As a direct and legal result of said conduct, Cummins has suffered substantial injury causing damages in an amount according to proof at trial, but in no event less than the jurisdictional minimums of this Court. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE Against All Defendants 22. Cummins incorporates by reference each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 17, inclusive, in this claim for relief. 4

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 5 of 7 PageID 183 23. Cummins had work booked for her return to California following her internship at Bat World Sanctuary. 24. Defendants owed a duty of care to Cummins based on the existence of a special relationship between the parties. 25. Defendants wrongfully interfered with the relationship between Cummins and her clients. Cummins was not able to work as a result of her injury. Cummins lost clients and employment. 26. As an actual and foreseeable result of Defendants negligent interference, Cummins has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at the time of trial, but in no event less than the jurisdictional minimums of this Court. Against All Defendants THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 27. Cummins incorporates by reference each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 17, inclusive, in this claim for relief. 28. Defendants conduct was outrageous. 29. Defendants negligence caused Plaintiff emotional distress. Defendants acted with reckless disregard of the rights, privileges and economic advantages of Plaintiff. 30. As a direct consequence of Defendants actions as described herein, Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress. 31. Defendants conduct was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff s emotional distress. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Cummins requests the following judgment against Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally, for: 5

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 6 of 7 PageID 184 32. For an order of compensatory, special, consequential and incidental damages caused by the negligent conduct of Defendants, and each of them, in an amount to be proven at trial but in no event less than the jurisdictional minimums of this Court $75,000; 33. Economic loss and loss of other benefits due as a result of defendants wrongful conduct in an amount to be determined at trial; 34. Damages of pain, suffering and emotional distress, in an amount to be determined at trial; 35. For an order of exemplary and punitive damages of $500,000; 36. For interest, reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit; 37. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. DATED: August 29, 2012 Respectfully submitted, /ss/ Mary Cummins Mary Cummins, Plaintiff 645 W. 9th St. #110-140 Los Angeles, CA 90015-1640 In Pro Per Direct: (310 877-4770 Direct Fax: (310 494-9395 Email: mmmaryinla@aol.com 6

Case 4:12-cv-00560-Y Document 28 Filed 08/29/12 Page 7 of 7 PageID 185 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mary Cummins, hereby certify that a TRUE AND CORRECT COPY of the above was served on the Plaintiffs Attorney of record by FIRST CLASS MAIL, FAX and EMAIL at, DAVID E. BURKE 10982 Roebling Avenue #553 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Also sent by Fax: (818 347-2148 Also sent by Email: davidedwardburke@gmail.com By: /ss/ Mary Cummins Mary Cummins, Plaintiff Pro Se 7